[Eruditass]

I don't think there is that much to go wrong with a FA43 to be honest. There is no active or high current circuitry in the FA43 - a non SDM prime only needs to report 2 (maybe 3 things): aperture, lens ID, and maybe current focus distance (for the EXIF).

Again, it transfers quite a bit more information:

Features and Operation of the Kaf Mount

I'm moderately confident (though I am absolutely NOT recommending that you try it) if water is poured over the lens/body junction it won't get in - the seal, though not waterproof, is fairly tight.

As for water going in via the focusing barrel - again doubt it - it's not waterproof but there is some protection against moisture and dust.

Your "moderately confident" speculation isn't very helpful to those who are in this thread worrying about primes in the rain.

I agree that for marketing purposes maybe Pentax should perhaps ... maybe just sell them as is but add a WR sticker, and that may satisfy those who need to see the letters imprinted on the lens with accompanying manufacturer guarantee.

Pentax isn't stupid.

[Christine Tham]

Again, it transfers quite a bit more information:

Features and Operation of the Kaf Mount

I appreciate that. I was listing the "minimum" that a prime lens should provide, and we know of lenses that don't even provide that (Sigma for example lacks Lens ID).

All those additional features mentioned in that article can be accommodated (and more) in a ROM or FPGA chip which is relatively resistant to water. It doesn't really change the point I was trying to make.

And I've already mentioned I am not trying to convince anyone or recommend anything, just offering my perspective and my point of view. Hopefully that will help others, but they can form other conclusions.

[Gimbal]

I appreciate that. I was listing the "minimum" that a prime lens should provide, and we know of lenses that don't even provide that (Sigma for example lacks Lens ID).

All those additional features mentioned in that article can be accommodated (and more) in a ROM or FPGA chip which is relatively resistant to water. It doesn't really change the point I was trying to make.

And I've already mentioned I am not trying to convince anyone or recommend anything, just offering my perspective and my point of view. Hopefully that will help others, but they can form other conclusions.

Sigma provides lens ID, problem is that some of their lenses uses the same ID. High current and water isn't a problem as long as it is combined with low voltage.

It is the high frequency stuff inside the house (the very fine pitched legs on the integrated circuits are probably not protected) and they do not like moisture. But water will probably not get all the way in there through the lens, but water inside the lens is bad enough without electrical problems. I would be very careful.

[Christine Tham]

It is the high frequency stuff inside the house (the very fine pitched legs on the integrated circuits are probably not protected) and they do not like moisture.

These days, just about everything is surface mounted. Although EEPROM chips may still be be socketed, so it depends on the age of the lens.

But these days most circuit boards are fairly tolerant of water damage. Some people have dropped phones into toilets and they still functioned. Not sure I would continue to use a phone that been in a toilet bowl though.

[Christine Tham]

Sigma provides lens ID

Not all. I remember some of the earlier ones register as "Unknown Lens."

[Gimbal]

These days, just about everything is surface mounted.

Of course, but the legs of the IC's are still exposed at their soldering points. But I'm more worried about the water leaving marks when drying inside the lens. (Not to mention fungus.)

But these days most circuit boards are fairly tolerant of water damage. Some people have dropped phones into toilets and they still functioned. Not sure I would continue to use a phone that been in a toilet bowl though.

I bet most phones would die though.

[Christine Tham]

Of course, but the legs of the IC's are still exposed at their soldering points.

Doesn't really matter, won't really cause any long term damage. In fact, if you spill coffee or soft drink over a circuit board, the recommended cleansing procedure is to wash the board in running water and let it dry. So, unless it was acid rain, a bit of rainwater isn't going to be a big deal.

Water and socketed ICs are bad though, because they can cause the pin clips to corrode.

[Gimbal]

Doesn't really matter, won't really cause any long term damage. In fact, if you spill coffee or soft drink over a circuit board, the recommended cleansing procedure is to wash the board in running water and let it dry.

Yes, but be sure to remove power first.

[Christine Tham]

Yes, but be sure to remove power first.

party pooper!

[Ash]

Be confident that the K-5 + prime should be able to withstand rainy/snowy conditions without issues. I've also taken out non-WR lenses in heavy rain with no ill to either camera or lens, and that includes the DA 16-45, which has ample opportunity to bring water into the lens interior. I'd agree that having the camera pointed down avoids tracking into the mount, but also, take a drying cloth for mopping up water on the lens afterwards.

[Christine Tham]

K-5 and the FA43 in the rain on Tue night. The predicted thunderstorm did not eventuate, but there was light drizzle. I didn't even bother protecting the lens - I wore a raincoat and just left the camera and lens exposed to the drizzle.



I like that the tree appears taller than the buildings in this one:

[newarts]

I'm naive here having no camera experience in the rain with other than bags & ponchos, but if the body is sealed why not just put a sealed UV filter & hood on the front of a prime lens and a loose fitting flexible latex tube over the lens barrel - seal it to the ends of the lens barrel (esp if auto focus is used)?

The O-ring at the Camera mount should take care of that joint.

[Gimbal]

The O-ring at the Camera mount should take care of that joint.

There is no O-ring at the camera mount if the lens isn't weather sealed.

[sterretje]

There is no O-ring at the camera mount if the lens isn't weather sealed.

There is one on a DA17-70 But it indeed seems an exception and it's not a prime

[Spotmatic]

Probably a good idea. I did look at it's weight specs compared to what I used to shoot with a couple of years ago (e620 + 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5) and it was similar. I've got the benefit of a camera shop about 1/2 an hour away and they carry Pentax, so I should probably head over there and see exactly how big/bulky it is.

Yes, go handle it. I think you are overthinking the issue. Just don't subject lenses
to abuse and you will be fine.